Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-28-2017
..... patentable" was repealed and the definition of the expression "invention" in section 2(1)(j) was changed, consequent upon ..... of the defendants that the technology of the plaintiffs has been wrongly patented in india on grounds other than those in the counter claim or that the claims granted thereby run foul of the provisions of plant varieties act do not impress. noticeably, by the patents (amendment) act, 2005, the then existing section 5 of the patents act, 1970 concerning "inventions where only methods or processes of manufacture .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-27-2017
..... by the appellant is that a notification dated 31st december, 1997 was issued by virtue of powers conferred under section 38 of the bureau of indian standards act, 1986 amending the bureau of indian standards (terms and conditions of service of employees) regulations, 1988 granting the scale of pay with effect from the date of the ..... da and other allowances etc., would be adjustable against ad hoc payments made from time to time. judgment of division bench dated 1.8.2000 this letters patent appeal is directed against the judgment dated 21st april, 1999 of the learned single judge. the bureau of indian standards employees union, respondent no.1 and respondents ..... one offset printing machine. three persons were employed on xeroxing and duplicating machines and seven persons were deployed on offset machine and allied equipment. since the year 2005, the offset machine is not operational and has already been approved for the requisite to bureau, information in response to w.p.(c) no.5594/2000 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Mar-24-2017
..... into force on 23rd october, 2015. thus, the arbitration was commenced, held, concluded and the award passed before coming into force of the amendment act. by section 19 of the said amendment act 2015 section 36 was replaced by a new section 36 which as follows: 36. enforcement. (1) where the time for making an application ..... a subsequent enactment, if it so provides expressly or by necessary intendment and not otherwise. in glaxo smith kline plc and ors.v.controller of patents and designs and ors.reported in (2008) 17 scc416mr.justice arijit pasayat remarked in paragraph 7 of the judgement that when the right of appeal was ..... 85a a new section 85a on transitory provisions has been incorporated. transitory provisions. (1) unless otherwise provided in the arbitration and conciliation (amending) act, 2014, the provisions of the instant act (as amended) 59 shall be prospective in operation and shall apply only to fresh arbitrations and fresh applications, except in the following situations (a) the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-21-2017
..... deserves attention at the threshold. section 100-a of the cpc was inserted by the amendment act 104 of 1976, which reads as under: 100-a. no further appeal in certain cases notwithstanding anything contained in any letters patent for any high court or in any other instrument having the force of law in ..... though this section was amended by the amendment act 46 of 1999, reference thereto is avoided as the said amendment was not given effect to.13. this provision underwent another amendment by amendment act 22 of 2002, to be refashioned as hereinbelow. 100-a: no further appeal in certain cases notwithstanding anything contained in any letters patent for any high ..... (supra), wherein it was held in unambiguous terms that only letters patent appeal, filed prior to the coming into force of the said amendment vide act 22 of 2002 would be maintainable and as a corollary, by virtue of the bar contained therein, letters patent appeal filed thereafter, would not be maintainable.16. as the contextual .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-21-2017
..... (enhancement of pecuniary jurisdiction and amendment) act, 1986 (maharashtra act 15 of 1987) (for short the 1987 act ), maharashtra high court (hearing of writ petitions by division bench and abolition of letters patent appeals) act, 1986 (maharashtra act 17 of 1986) (for short the 1986 act ) and madhya pradesh uchcha nyayalaya (letters patent appeals samapti) adhiniyam, 1981 ..... new delhi; march 21, 2017.-.---------------------- [1]. [2]. (2014) 2 scc1[3]. [4]. (2013) 3 scc117[5]. [6]. air1965sc1595[7]. [8]. (1965) 2 scr756[9]. [10]. (2005) 2 scc591[11]. [12]. (1966) 1 scr190[13]. [14]. 1986 (supp.) scc401[15]. [16]. air1968sc1481[17]. [18]. (1973) 1 scr185[19]. [20]. (2009) 10 scc584[21 ..... air1954sc215[39]. [40]. (2002) 1 scc319[41]. [42]. (2010) 8 scc329[43]. [44]. (2013) 9 scc374[45]. [46]. (2004) 4 scc785[47]. [48]. (2005) 1 scc481[49]. [50]. (2005) 6 scc344[51]. [52]. (2015) 9 scc1[53]. [54]. (1999) 6 scc275[55]. [56]. air1955sc233[57]. [58]. air1954sc440[59]. [60]. 2000 (2) alt448(f. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Mar-15-2017
..... ) of code of civil procedure, 1908 and dismissal of the suit with exemplary costs. according to the defendant no.1/petitioner averment in paragraph 12 of the amended plaint reveals that the subject matter of the suit is immovable property admeasuring 3000 sq. ft. at eastern metropolitan bye pass at silver springs, no.5, jbs ..... mukherji versus barhoo mahto).in the instant suit, the property though situated outside the original jurisdiction of this court, as per clause 12 of the letters patent, 1865, this hon ble court may not have the territorial jurisdiction to try the said suit yet the suit being a suit for specific performance of contract ..... agreement, the registrar, original side, be directed to specifically perform the said agreement in the manner aforesaid; (iii) perpetual injunction restraining the defendant no.1 from acting in breach of and/or in derogation of or in any manner inconsistent with the agreement as pleaded in paragraph 12 above; (c1) mandatory injunction directing the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-08-2017
..... pharmaceutical co. 572 f. supp. 255 (e.d.n.y. 1983), even experimentation, research and development in the patented product was prohibited as the same would have eventually led to commercial exploitation; ii) the hatch waxman act, 1984 amended the patents act of usa to undo roche products, inc. vs. bolar pharmaceutical co. supra; iii) that was the origin of ..... exclusivity/monopoly; v) reliance was placed on the minutes of the joint parliamentary committee constituted to amend the patents act of india; vi) section 107a came into existence in the patents act for the first time in the year 2002 and it was amended in the year 2003; the word export / exporting was consciously not added thereto; vii) research, development ..... with an evil eye and unequal hand . in the context of challenge to the vires of a statute, in sushil kumar sharma vs. union of india (2005) 6 scc281 it was held to be well settled that a mere possibility of abuse of a provision of law does not per se invalidate a legislation .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-08-2017
..... pharmaceutical co. 572 f. supp. 255 (e.d.n.y. 1983), even experimentation, research and development in the patented product was prohibited as the same would have eventually led to commercial exploitation; ii) the hatch waxman act, 1984 amended the patents act of usa to undo roche products, inc. vs. bolar pharmaceutical co. supra; iii) that was the origin of ..... exclusivity/monopoly; v) reliance was placed on the minutes of the joint parliamentary committee constituted to amend the patents act of india; vi) section 107a came into existence in the patents act for the first time in the year 2002 and it was amended in the year 2003; the word export / exporting was consciously not added thereto; vii) research, development ..... with an evil eye and unequal hand . in the context of challenge to the vires of a statute, in sushil kumar sharma vs. union of india (2005) 6 scc281 it was held to be well settled that a mere possibility of abuse of a provision of law does not per se invalidate a legislation .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-07-2017
..... statement. the trial court by the impugned order concluded that there are no cogent reasons given to explain the delay and concluded that there is patent delay in filing of the amended written statement. the application was dismissed.6. 7. i have heard learned counsel for the parties. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the ..... the order dated 26.11.2016 by which an application filed by the petitioner/ndmc under section 5 of the limitation act seeking condonation of delhi in filing of the amended written statement after the amendment to the written statement was allowed was dismissed.2. respondent no.1/plaintiff has filed a suit for permanent/mandatory ..... pending since 2007 and is needlessly being delayed. he submits that merely because the petitioner is a government organisation would not give it any greater justification to act without bona fide and in a negligent manner. he seeks to rely upon various judgments to support his contention.9. the settled legal position is that the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-03-2017
..... 32. in 1993 during the pendency of this writ petition, original clause 6 of academic ordinance of 1976 of the jnu act relating to conditions of service of university appointed teachers was amended. under the act, no change could be made in terms and conditions of service of a teacher after his/her appointment so as to ..... & its vice- chancellor to reconstitute the selection committee with due regard to specialization i.e. international relations in accordance with relevant statute and reasoning provided for amending the said statute having regard to the recommendation of the ganendragadkar committee on governance of universities and colleges; (c) direct the respondent university and its vice-chancellor ..... in person, had earlier filed slp(c)no.26924 of 2012 challenging the judgment and order dated 13.7.2012 of the high court of delhi in letters patent appeal no.93 of 2012, which was dismissed by us on 21.9.2012 passing the following order:"after arguing the matters for quite some time, the .....
Tag this Judgment!